High dosage strength tablets of rucaparib

ABSTRACT

A tablet including high dosage of 8-fluoro-2-{4-[(methylamino)methyl]phenyl}-1,3,4,5-tetrahydro-6H-azepino[5,4,3-cd]indol-6-one camsylate salt has been disclosed.

RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a divisional of U.S. application Ser. No.14/828,065, filed Aug. 17, 2015, entitled “High Dosage Strength Tabletsof Rucaparib.” U.S. application Ser. No. 14/828,065 claims priority toU.S. provisional application Ser. No. 62/040,849, filed Aug. 22, 2014and U.S. provisional application Ser. No. 62/101,739, filed Jan. 9,2015. Each of the application referenced above are herein incorporatedby reference in their entirety.

FIELD

The present disclosure relates, in general, to tablets of rucaparib, andmore particularly, to high dosage strength tablets of rucaparib.

BACKGROUND

The compound8-fluoro-2-{4-[(methylamino)methyl]phenyl}-1,3,4,5-tetrahydro-6H-azepino[5,4,3-cd]indol-6-one(“rucaparib”) is a small molecule inhibitor of poly(ADP-ribose)polymerase (PARP).

Rucaparib, and methods of making it, are described, e.g., in U.S. Pat.Nos. 6,495,541 and 7,323,562. U.S. Pat. No. 6,495,541 describes salts ofrucaparib in general, and solid dosage forms in general (col. 9, lines7-61), with broad dose ranges expressed as mg/kg body weight (col. 26,lines 7-20). The issue of dose loading, i.e., percent drug content ofthe formulation, is not addressed. Certain salts and polymorphs ofrucaparib are disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,351,701, 7,351,530 and7,268,126, and in U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004-0248879.U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,351,701 and 7,351,530 describe the use of the phosphatesalt of rucaparib. They refer to all dosage forms generally, includingtablets ('701 patent, col. 6, lines 48-57; '530 patent, col. 6, lines30-38), though the only working example is of a liquid formulation ofunspecified content. Again, the issue of dose loading is not addressed,and in fact it is stated that “only very low doses . . . are needed”('701 patent, col. 6, lines 21-24; lines '530 patent, col. 6, lines3-6). Published Application 2004-0248879 describes the phosphate andglucuronate salts of rucaparib, and solid dosage forms thereof generally(Paragraphs 0035-0036), with doses described in terms of mg/kg bodyweight (Paragraph 0036). No specific formulations are exemplified ordescribed, and the issue of dose loading is not addressed.

U.S. Pat. No. 8,754,072 (“the '072 patent”) discloses solid dosage formsof rucaparib maleate and rucaparib camsylate. The '072 patent statesthat of the pharmaceutically acceptable counter ions suitable for usewith active ingredients, the maleate and camsylate salts of rucaparibwere found to be less hygroscopic as compared to other salt forms (col.11, lines 45-49), “making them particularly suitable in the preparationof solid dosage forms” (col. 11, lines 49-50). In addition, the maleateand camsylate salts of rucaparib were found to be more easily preparedand isolated than other salt forms (col. 11, lines 51-53). The '072patent states very broadly that the compositions “will generally containanywhere from about 0.001% by weight to about 99% by weight activeingredient,” with preferred ranges of from about 0.01% to about 5% andabout 0.01% to 2% (col. 36, lines 41-47). Embodiments containing 10%-25%active ingredient are also disclosed (col. 3, line 65-col. 4, line 9;col. 5, line 60-col. 6, line 4). The only working example of aformulation (Example 13) relates to a formulation comprising 17.18% ofthe camsylate salt. Thus, the '072 patent does not specifically addressthe issue of a high dose rucaparib formulation, and indeed, like theprior art discussed above, teaches that a lower dose loading (i.e.,under 25%) is preferable.

Clinical development of oral rucaparib camsylate was initiated withtablets of lower strength (40 mg and 60 mg). As individual doserequirements increased a higher dosage strength of 120 mg was developedemploying 32% drug loading and a dry granulation manufacturing process.Formulation modification relative to lower strengths was required toprepare 120 mg tablets, suggesting that drug loading significantlyhigher than 32% would be difficult to achieve with a dry granulationprocess.

Clinical studies of rucaparib indicated the need for a high unit dose(200 mg-800 mg) of active ingredient. For convenient oraladministration, generally the tablet weight should not exceed 800 mg. Asthe number of tablets required per dose can lead to compliance issues,it would be desirable to find a formulation that could be commerciallymade that resulted in fewer tablets required per dose with the resultantexpectation that there would be improved patient compliance.

Thus, there is a need for developing tablet dosage forms containing arucaparib salt that 1) has suitable size in order to allow the patientto easily swallow the tablet, 2) has a high load of rucaparib in orderto minimize the number of tablets required per dose, 3) has suitableproperties with respect to the release of the rucaparib from the tablet,and 4) has the pharmaceutical behavior that leads to the desired effect.In some embodiments, the dosage form can be a capsule.

The overall physical properties and manufacturability of low drugloading formulations is determined predominantly by the inactiveingredients or excipients in the formulation. However, at high drugloading, the contribution of the physical properties of the activepharmaceutical ingredient (“API”) to the manufacturability of aformulation becomes predominant. Not all APIs possess the necessaryproperties with respect to compressibility that are required in order toobtain a high load tablet using a dry granulation process.

Most small molecule API's, can be formulated in low dose forms becausethe physical properties of the excipients utilized in the formulationsdominate the properties of the solid composition, rather than thephysical properties of the API itself. As drug loading increases thephysicochemical characteristics of the drug substance become increasingdominant in the tablet manufacturing process. It is common to includefiller excipients in a single formulation that possess brittlecharacteristics and others that possess ductile/plastic characteristics.The combination of the brittle and plastic type materials in a givenformulation are important to the “manufacturability” of thatformulation. However, because API's can have a full spectrum of physicalproperties and are not selected based on these physical properties, itis not to be expected that a particular API would have the physicalproperties to favorably contribute to an overall formulation in terms ofmanufacturability and stability. In fact, it is not infrequent that itis the physical properties of the API that actually present the largestobstacle to creating a workable formulation. It is therefore surprisingand unanticipated where it is found that an API can be formulated in adry granulating manufacturing process with drug loads in excess of 45%.In fact, prior experience taught that it was likely not possible tocreate a formulation of rucaparib at a dose loading significantlyexceeding 32%.

The ability to prepare rucaparib camsylate tablets at a drug loading inexcess of 45% using a dry granulation process as described below is asurprising observation that is attributable to the uniquephysicochemical characteristics of the camsylate salt of rucaparib. Inthe current invention, no brittle filler excipients are necessary due tothe unique and unexpected physicochemical characteristics of rucaparibcamsylate.

As with hygroscopicity, and ease of manufacturing, the ability to formhigh dosage forms of an active ingredient may also be dependent on thespecific salt form of the drug. However, hygroscopicity and ease ofmanufacturing at low dose loadings is not predictive of suitability forhigh dose formulations. This is demonstrated below, by the datapresented herein showing that the maleate salt of rucaparib (showingfavorable hygroscopicity and manufacturing properties in low doseformulations) cannot be formulated as a high dose form in a drygranulation manufacturing process.

In the present case, the inventors have surprisingly found that only oneof the salt forms suitable for dry granulation manufacturing based on aconstellation of physicochemical properties, such as hygroscopicity,brittle behavior and crystalline properties, would also have theappropriate physical properties for high dose formulations—i.e., thecamsylate salt.

BRIEF SUMMARY

The invention is directed to high dosage strength tablets of rucaparib.In some embodiments, the tablet includes 45-90% w/w rucaparib camsylate.In some embodiments, the dry granulated tablet includes 45-90% w/wrucaparib camsylate. One such embodiment is a tablet containing at least200 mg rucaparib. Another embodiment is a tablet containing at least 300mg rucaparib.

In some embodiments, the method of treating a mammalian diseasecondition mediated by poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase activity, includesadministering to a mammal in need thereof a therapeutically effectiveamount of the high dosage strength tablets of rucaparib. In someembodiments, a method of treating cancer in a mammal includesadministering to the mammal a therapeutically effective amount of thehigh dosage strength tablets of rucaparib.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 shows the relationship of formulations 1-5 in Table 1 looking atthe achievable tensile strength for a given compression stress.

FIG. 2 shows tensile strength for a given solid faction of formulations1-5 in Table 1.

FIG. 3 shows tensile strength for a given compression stress offormulations 1-5 in Table 1.

FIG. 4 shows the dissolution results for the tablet formulations 3-5 inTable 1.

FIG. 5 shows particle size distributions of 300 mg final tablet blendand feedframe sample.

FIGS. 6A-C show compression profile versus magnesium stearate levelevaluation.

FIG. 7 shows tabletability of rucaparib camsylate and maleate 60% and75% loaded formulations.

FIG. 8 shows tabletability of intra granular rucaparib camsylateformulations.

FIG. 9 shows compactability of intra granular rucaparib camsylateformulations.

FIG. 10 shows compressibility of intra granular rucaparib camsylateformulations.

FIG. 11 shows tabletability of intra granular rucaparib maleateformulations.

FIG. 12 shows compactability of intra granular rucaparib maleateformulations.

FIG. 13 shows compressibility of intra granular rucaparib maleateformulations.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF CERTAIN EMBODIMENTS

While various aspects and features of certain embodiments have beensummarized above, the following detailed description illustrates a fewexemplary embodiments in further detail to enable one of skill in theart to practice such embodiments. The described examples are providedfor illustrative purposes and are not intended to limit the scope of theinvention.

In the following description, for the purposes of explanation, numerousspecific details are set forth in order to provide a thoroughunderstanding of the described embodiments. It will be apparent to oneskilled in the art, however, that other embodiments of the present maybe practiced without some of these specific details.

Unless otherwise indicated, all numbers used herein to expressquantities, dimensions, and so forth used should be understood as beingmodified in all instances by the term “about.” In this application, theuse of the singular includes the plural unless specifically statedotherwise, and use of the terms “and” and “or” means “and/or” unlessotherwise indicated. Moreover, the use of the term “including,” as wellas other forms, such as “includes” and “included,” should be considerednon-exclusive.

Rucaparib camsylate salt possesses low hygroscopicity while retainingdesirable physicochemical characteristics, e.g., polymorphic control andaqueous solubility, compared to other salts of rucaparib. The lowhygroscopicity of the claimed salt is a commercially important propertybecause it greatly facilitates the production of a solid dosage form ofrucaparib for oral administration which is highly desirable to patientsreceiving rucaparib treatment.

Surprisingly, it was found that in addition to its low hygroscopicityrucaparib camsylate is a salt that has advantageous properties withrespect to compressibility and that it is possible to manufacturetablets thereof with a load of 45% w/w or more. This means that thepresent invention provides tablets that may have such a high content ofrucaparib that a necessary daily dose can be provided in one, two, orthree tablets.

In some embodiments, the tablets contain 45-90% w/w rucaparib camsylate,such as, e.g., 50-90% w/w, 55-90% w/w, 60-90% w/w, 65-85% w/w, or 70-80%w/w rucaparib camsylate. In some embodiments, the tablets contain atleast 300 mg rucaparib, such as, e.g., at least 350 mg, at least 400 mg,at least 450 mg, at least 500 mg, or at least 550 mg rucaparib. In someembodiments, the tablets contain at least 200 mg rucaparib, such as,e.g., at least 250 mg, at least 300 mg, or at least 350 mg rucaparib.

In order to obtain a desired pharmaceutical performance, the tabletsmust release rucaparib camsylate in a suitable time frame. In someembodiments, the tablet releases at least 95% w/w of rucaparib camsylatecontained within the tablet within 30 min, when tested in 0.01N HClaccording to USP II Paddles and at 75 rpm. In another embodiment, thetablet releases at least 95% w/w of rucaparib camsylate contained withinthe tablet within 15 min, when tested in 0.01N HCl according to USP IIPaddles and at 75 rpm. In still another embodiment, the tablet releasesat least 95% w/w of rucaparib camsylate contained within the tabletwithin 10 min, when tested in 0.01N HCl according to USP II Paddles andat 75 rpm.

The tablets may include one or more pharmaceutically acceptableexcipients, carriers, or diluents/fillers. Surfactants, diluents,sweeteners, disintegrants, binders, lubricants, glidants, colorants,flavors, stabilizing agents, mixtures thereof and the like can be used.Fillers include both ductile filler and brittle fillers and include, butare not limited to, mannitol, sorbitol, xylitol, microcrystallinecellulose, silicified microcrystalline cellulose, hydroxypropylmethylcellulose, hydroxypropyl cellulose, pullulan and fast dissolvingcarbohydrates such as Pharmaburst™, mixtures thereof or the like.Ductile fillers yield and start to deform plastically after a criticalstress. Ductile fillers often result in tablets of low porosity becausethe high degree of plastic deformation enables the particles to movevery close to each other. Brittle fillers fragment into smaller units ata certain stress value. The fragmentation of brittle fillers results inan increase of smaller particles. Brittle fillers which undergoextensive fragmentation generally result in tablets of relatively highporosity because of the large number of bonding points that are createdwhich prevent further volume reduction. Because rucaparib camsylate isfairly brittle, in some embodiments, a ductile excipient, for examplemicroscrystalline cellulose is used as the main filler without a brittlefiller.

Glidants are, but not limited to, silicon dioxide, colloidal silicondioxide, calcium silicate, magnesium silicate, magnesium trisilicate,talc, starch, mixtures thereof or the like.

Lubricants are, but not limited to, calcium stearate, glycerylmonostearate, glyceryl behenate, glyceryl palmitostearate, hexagonalboron nitride, hydrogenated vegetable oil, light mineral oil, magnesiumstearate, mineral oil, polyethylene glycol, poloxamer, sodium benzoate,sodium lauryl sulfate, sodium stearyl fumarate, stearic acid, talc, zincstearate, mixtures thereof or the like.

Disintegrants are, but not limited to, sodium starch glycolate, sodiumcarboxymethyl cellulose, calcium carboxymethyl cellulose, croscarmellosesodium, crospovidone, chitosan, agar, alginic acid, calcium alginate,methyl cellulose, microcrystalline cellulose, powdered cellulose, loweralkylsubstituted hydroxypropyl cellulose, hydroxylpropyl starch,low-substituted hydroxypropylcellulose, polacrilin potassium, starch,pregelatinized starch, sodium alginate, magnesium aluminum silicate,polacrilin potassium, povidone, sodium starch glycolate, mixturesthereof or the like.

In some embodiments, the tablets contain 5-50% w/w filler, such as,e.g., 5-45% w/w, 5-40% w/w, 5-35% w/w, 5-30% w/w, 10-25% w/w, or 15-20%w/w filler. In some embodiments, the filler consists essentially ofductile filler(s). In some embodiments, the tablets contain 1-20%disintegrant, such as, e.g., 1-15% w/w, 1-10% w/w, 2-9% w/w, 3-8% w/w,4-7% w/w, or 5-7% w/w disintegrant. In some embodiments, the tabletscontain 0.20-2.5% w/w lubricant, such as, e.g., 0.2-2.0% w/w, 0.2-1.8%w/w, 0.2-1.5% w/w, or 0.25-1.5% w/w lubricant. In some embodiments, thetablets contain 0-1% w/w glidant, such as, e.g., 0.25-0.75% w/w, or0.25-0.50% w/w glidant.

Dry granulation is a well-known pharmaceutical manufacturing process. Ingeneral, API is combined with excipients and lubricant and thencompacted to form a mass. This mass typically is then comminuted ormilled, then sieved to obtain the desired size of particle. The granularproduct is then compressed into tablets, filled into capsules orotherwise formed into a unitary dosage form in conventional fashion. Insome embodiments, high dosage rucaparib tablets are produced by thisprocess. In other embodiments, the granular product comprising highdosage rucaparib is filled into capsules or otherwise formed into aunitary dosage form.

Compaction into a mass is accomplished by conventional equipment.Typically, the blended API and excipients are passed through a rollercompactor or chilsonator apparatus for compaction. However, other meansfor compacting, e.g., compaction into slugs (or “slugging”), theAPI/excipient blend optionally are used. This in turn is comminuted ormilled, and then optionally sieved to produce the desired size granules.

A dry granulated composition comprising rucaparib camsylate is definedas the product of a dry granulation process. Dry granulated compositionsinclude the direct product of dry granulation, i.e., dry granules perse, as well as products made from such granules including tablets,capsules, suppositories and other pharmaceutical dosage forms.

The tablet may be prepared by dry granulation comprising the steps of:

i) preparing a mixture containing rucaparib camsylate,

ii) compacting the mixture obtained in step (i) by a compact roller toform a comprimate,

iii) converting the comprimate obtained in step (ii) into a granulate,

iv) optionally mixing the granulate obtained in step (iii) with apharmaceutical excipient, and

v) subjecting the granulate obtained in step (iii) or the mixtureobtained in step (iv) to compression to obtain the tablet.

EXAMPLES Example 1: Evaluation of Intra Granular Formulations

Intragranular means that these ingredients are found within the drygranule structure. Extragranular means the material is locatedexternally to granule structure. Table 1 summarizes intra granularformulations that have been evaluated. Formulations 1 and 2 areconsidered best and worst case scenarios, with formulation 1 being pure100% Rucaparib Camsylate API, and formulation 2 being used tomanufacture the 120 mgA formulation. Formulations 3 and 4 were designedto look at different levels of ductile and brittle fillers, andformulation 5 was an increased tablet size to evaluate loading impact.All formulations 3-5 had the addition of colloidal silica dioxide(Cab-O-Sil) to aid in the flowability of the intra granular blends.

TABLE 1 Intragranular Formulations Formulation 1 2 3 4 5 Core Weight(mg) N/A 640 700 700 800 Dose (mgA) N/A 120 300 300 300 Active (w/w)Rucaparib Camsylate 100.00% 32.22% 73.65% 73.65% 64.44% Ductile FillerMicrocrystalline N/A N/A 13.23% 18.86% 19.69% Cellulose PH101 DuctileFiller Microcrystalline N/A 45.08% N/A N/A N/A Cellulose PH102 BrittleFiller Di-Calcium Phosphate N/A 19.16%  5.63% N/A  8.37% DisintegrantSodium Starch Glycolate N/A  2.81%  6.00%  6.00%  6.00% GlidantColloidal Silicon N/A N/A  0.50%  0.50%  0.50% Dioxide LubricantMagnesium stearate N/A  0.20%  0.25%  0.25%  0.25%

FIG. 1 shows the relationship of each formulation looking at theachievable tensile strength for a given compression stress. The maximumacceptable force considered within normal ranges on a rotary tabletpress is approximately 250 MPa. A common target tensile strength fortablets is 2 MPa; such tablets generally have low friability, and aresuitable for downstream handling and film coating. Thus, if a givenformulation can be compressed to a tensile strength of 2 MPa at acompression stress of less than 250 MPa, it is considered to haveacceptable compressibility. Formulations 3-5 had acceptablecompressibility and were an improvement over API alone. Whileformulations with acceptable compressibility can be manufactured, it ispreferred to maintain lower compression forces while still being able toachieve the target tensile strength as this provides more robustness toAPI, raw material and environmental variations and less wear ontableting equipment and tooling. Formulations 3-5 achieve this balance.

FIGS. 2 and 3 provide information related to the solid fraction offormulation of rucaparib camsylate. It is important to ensure thattablets have efficient porosity so that fluid has the opportunity toeffectively travel into the tablet and activate disintegration. Allformulations tested have acceptable solid fractions for the targettensile strength and are within ranges of tablets containing API andexcipients.

Example 2: Disintegration and Dissolution of High Dosage Formulations

Small scale batch of tablets from formulations 3-5 were manufactured andtested for disintegration and dissolution. The tablets were made usingsmall scale slugging-based dry granulation and tablet compressiontechniques. Slugs were compacted at a relatively low tensile strength ofapproximately 0.3 MPa to minimize potential impact on final tabletcompressibility, milled using a mortar/pestle and 20 mesh screentechnique, and final blended with 0.5% Cab-O-Sil and 0.25% magnesiumstearate added as extra granular excipients. Table 2 is a summary of theformulations that were manufactured into tablets and the correspondingtensile strength and hardness.

TABLE 2 Formulations Evaluated for correlating tensile strength andhardness Formulation 3 4 5 Core Weight (mg) 700 700 800 Dose (mgA) 300300 300 Intra Granular Excipients Active Rucaparib Camsylate 73.65%73.65% 64.44% Ductile Filler Microcrystalline 13.23% 18.86% 19.69%Cellulose PH101 Ductile Filler Microcrystalline N/A N/A N/A CellulosePH102 Brittle Filler Di-Calcium Phosphate 5.63% N/A 8.37% DisintegrantSodium Starch 6.00% 6.00% 6.00% Glycolate Glidant Colloidal Silicon0.50% 0.50% 0.50% Dioxide Lubricant Magnesium stearate 0.25% 0.25% 0.25%Extra Granular Excipients Glidant Colloidal Silicon 0.50% 0.50% 0.50%Dioxide Lubricant Magnesium stearate 0.25% 0.25% 0.25% Compression DataTensile Strength (MPa) 2.06 2.05 2.00 Hardness (kP) 21.2 21.1 20.0

Table 3 shows disintegration results from a USP Disintegration apparatuswith 0.01N HCl (pH=2.0) as the disintegration media. FIG. 4 shows thegraphical dissolution results for the tablet formulations 3-5, performedin a USP Type II dissolution apparatus. The dissolution condition is:0.01N HCl (pH=2.0), USP II Paddles, 75 rpm, Japanese Sinkers.Formulations 3-5 disintegrated and dissolved rapidly and completely.Table 4 shows the tabular dissolution results at 15 min, 30 min, and 60min.

TABLE 3 Disintegration results for formulations 3-5 (USP Disintegrationapparatus with 0.01N HCl (pH = 2.0) media). Formulation 3 Formulation 4Formulation 5 Disintegration Time 15 14 15 (sec) Tensile Strength 2.062.05 2.00 (MPa)

TABLE 4 Dissolved percentage of formulations 3-5. Formulation 3Formulation 4 Formulation 5 Time (min) Average % Dose Dissolved 15 96.1098.40 98.60 30 97.65 98.71 98.14 60 98.08 99.14 99.39

Example 3: Particle Size Distributions of Final Tablet Blend andFeedframe Sample

FIG. 5 shows particle size distributions of 300 mg final tablet blend ofFormulation 4 and feed frame sample (at end of run). The particle sizedistribution is desirable for material handling and flow. The feed frameof the tablet press did not significantly change the particle size ofthe final blend during processing.

Example 4: Effect of Lubricant Level on Compressibility

FIGS. 6A-C show an intragranular magnesium stearate level evaluation.All compression profiles of intragranular blends made with varyinglevels of magnesium stearate have acceptable behavior. The boxes withsolid lines represent the typical range of target tensile strengths forroller compaction and the correlating compression stress and solidfraction. The boxes with dashed lines represent the typical range oftarget tensile strengths for tableting and correlating compressionstress and solid fraction. All intragranular blends with varying levelsof magnesium stearate have acceptable achievable tensile strength valuesat less than 150 MPa compression stress.

Example 5: Tablet a Process

A 10-kg batch was made according to the formula in Table 5 usingconditions in Tables 6-8. The blend was compacted by roller compactionon Gerteis Mini Pactor using the parameters listed in Table 6. Then, thecompacted blend was granulated using the parameters listed in Table 7.Then, the granulated blend was tablet compressed on tablet press usingthe parameters listed in Table 8 to a target weight of about 700 mg.

TABLE 5 Composition of Tablet A 700 mg Ingredient % of Blend mg/tabletIntragranular Rucaparib Camsylate 73.65%  515.6 Microcrystalline 17.60% 123.2 Cellulose PH 101 Sodium Starch 6.00% 42.0 Glycolate ColloidalSilicon 0.50% 3.5 Dioxide Magnesium Stearate  1.5% 10.5 (Extragranular)Colloidal Silicon 0.50% 3.5 Dioxide Magnesium Stearate 0.25% 1.8  100%700.0

TABLE 6 Roll Design Smooth/Smooth With Side Rim Yes Target Solidfraction 0.70-0.75 Tensile strength (MPa) 0.2-0.4 Compression Force(kN/cm) 6 Roll Speed (rpm) 2 Tamp/Feed Ratio (%) 160-200 Gap Width (mm)2

TABLE 7 Rotor Type Pocket Screen Size  1.0 Mill Gap Setting   1 mm MillGap Measured 1.3 mm Rotor Direction CW 240, CCW 300 Rotor rpm 60 GapControl Activated yes Torque Control OFF OFF

TABLE 8 Tooling 0.3183 × 0.6367 M.O. Tablet Weight 700 mg TargetHardness 23kP Tensile strength (MPa) ~2.05 Compression Force (kN)  22Feeder Speed (rpm) 15-20 Turret Speed (RPM)  20

Example 6: Evaluating Tablet Compressibility Properties of RucaparibCamsylate and Maleate Salts

Studies with low dose rucaparib tablets have shown that rucaparibcamsylate and rucaparib maleate possess a constellation ofphysicochemical properties that may be useful in solid dosage forms.However, previous work suggested that dose loading at higher than 32%API would be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. This example isan evaluation of rucaparib camsylate and maleate salts forcompressibility properties with respect to dry granulation processingfor the manufacture of a high API-loading tablet. The objective was toidentify a salt form of rucaparib with properties suitable for high doseformats for dry granulation tablet compression.

The most relevant and broadly accepted approach to assessing compressionevaluation of different formulations (and different API salts) is bymeasuring the interrelationships of compression stress, solid fraction,and tensile strength using a compaction simulator. These parameters arerelated to each other in a set of relationships referred to ascompressibility, tabletability, and compactability profiles (i.e., CTCProfiles) (Tye, Sun, Amidon, J. Pharm. Sci, 94: 465-472, (2005)).

Focus was on the intra granular blend rather than the final blendbecause nearly all of the lead formulation is processed through drygranulation; only a small portion is extra granular. Additionally, theextra granular lubrication step at small scale is not representative ofdownstream pilot or commercial processing and risks masking intrinsiccompressibility properties. For the provided lot of each salt form,formulations were evaluated at 100%, 90%, 75%, and 60% of the finaltablet formulation (this correlates to 100%, 90.68%, 75.57%, and 60.45%intra granular components).

Table 10 summarizes the formulations evaluated. Both salt forms ofrucaparib were evaluated at various loadings of the API, including oneformulation for each whereby pure API was tested.

CTC profiles for each API and formulation were determined by compressing(Texture Technologies model TA.XT Plus Texture Analyzer), in triplicate,¼″ round flat-faced 100 mg compacts using a linear sawtooth strainprofile at 5 mm/sec velocity to four pre-programmed peak forcesencompassing roller compaction and tableting compression stress ranges(e.g., up to ˜240 MPa). The compacts were then evaluated for physicaldimensions, weight, and hardness. From these data and measured truedensity (Micromeritics Accypyc 1340 helium pynchnometer), thecompression stress, tensile strength and solid fraction values werecalculated and the respective CTC profiles generated.

The maximum acceptable compression stress considered within normalranges of a commercial rotary tablet press is approximately 250 MPa.Similarly, a typical target tensile strength for tablets is 2 MPa; suchtablets generally have low friability, and are suitable for downstreamhandling and film coating. Thus, if a given formulation can becompressed to a tensile strength of 2 MPa at a compression stress ofless than 250 MPa, it is considered to have acceptable compressibility.

The most direct comparison of the salt compressibility would be pure APIwithout excipients. However, the pure maleate salt compacts were notable to be formed. Attempts to create compacts at very high forces—andeven at a reduced, 90%, loading—resulted in compacts that flaked apart,capped and therefore were not able to be assessed for tensile strengthor other compaction parameters. This result was the first indication themaleate API is not amendable to compression in higher loading tabletformulations. Surprisingly, the camsylate API formed good compacts thatshow good tableting properties for all formulations evaluated, includingpure API.

Tabletability is the most direct relationship of the CTC profiles toillustrate capability to form tablets on rotary tablet presses. FIG. 7and Table 9 show the tabletability (compression stress verses tensilestrength) comparison of the two most relevant formulations for theprojected 300 mg (non-salt basis) tablet strengths −60 and 75% APIloading.

TABLE 9 Tabular Data Compression Compression Tensile Tensile Drug StressStress Strength Strength Salt Form Load (MPa) (Std Dev) (MPa) (Std Dev)Camsylate 60% 47.9 0.1 0.6 0.0 80.3 0.6 1.3 0.0 176.0 0.1 2.6 0.1 240.41.1 3.1 0.1 Camsylate 75% 48.3 0.5 0.6 0.0 80.8 0.1 1.1 0.0 177.8 0.82.3 0.1 240.1 0.9 2.8 0.4 Maleate 60% 47.9 0.2 0.3 0.0 80.4 0.4 0.6 0.1177.0 0.5 1.2 0.1 239.5 1.1 1.4 0.1 Maleate 75% 48.5 0.4 0.2 0.0 80.50.2 0.4 0.0 176.8 0.9 0.8 0.1 240.7 1.1 0.8 0.0

The camsylate salt formulations show superior tensile strength values,amendable to tablet compression, at much lower compression forces thanthe maleate salt. Indeed, the maleate salt formulations do not achievethe target tensile strength of 2 MPa even at 250 MPa; furthermore, thecurve's asymptotic appearing plateau at >200 MPa suggests acceptabletensile strength tablets may not be achievable at all, even at extremecompression forces. Stated differently, the tabletability of the maleatesalt is approximately 2-2.5× lower than the camsylate salt, and fallsbelow the acceptable threshold for tableting. Thus, substantially lowerloaded maleate salt formulations would be required for dry granulationtableting, when compared to the camsylate salt.

Since all of the 60-100% loaded camsylate formulations show achievabletensile strength of at least 2.0 MPa at modest compression stresses (seeFIG. 8), a general conclusion can be made that all are acceptable from atabletability standpoint. Conversely, none of the 60-100% maleate saltformulations achieved 2.0 MPa tensile strength (FIGS. 7 and 11).

The data shown in FIGS. 8-10 are the CTC profiles for the 4 formulationsthat were analyzed with the camsylate salt. Similarly, the data shown inFIGS. 11-13 are the CTC profiles for the 3 formulations that werecapable of being analyzed for the maleate salt. The pure maleate saltwas not amendable to analysis based on inability to form intact compactsat 90% and 100% API formulations.

The CTC profiles generated show that the camsylate salt evaluated ismuch more amendable to dry granulation and tablet compression processes.Additionally, the maleate salt compressibility is inferior to thecamsylate salt such that maleate drug loading would need to decreasefrom the target of >70% to estimated <50% to obtain tablets withsufficient strength for downstream coating, packaging, and/or shippingprocesses.

Last, it is notable that the CTC profiles to camsylate API loading over60-100% is not highly sensitive to API loading. Thus, compressibilityshould not be limiting for very high loading (high dose:tablet sizeratio) tablets. Rather, the upper limit would likely be other quality orprocessing attributes such as disintegration, dissolution, powder flowor sticking, making tablet strengths of rucaparib camsylate greater than300 mg possible.

TABLE 10 Initial Intra Granular Formulations Evaluated for RucaparibSalt Forms Formulation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Active Rucaparib Camsylate 60.45%75.57% 90.68% 100.0% NA NA NA NA Active Rucaparib Maleate NA NA NA NA60.45% 75.57% 90.68% 100.0% Ductile Microcrystalline 31.49% 16.37% 1.26%  0.00% 31.49% 16.37%  1.26%  0.00% Filler cellulose (AvicelPH101) Disintegrant Sodium Starch Glycolate  6.00%  6.00%  6.00%  0.00% 6.00%  6.00%  6.00%  0.00% (Explotab) Glidant Colloidal Silica Dioxide 0.50%  0.50%  0.50%  0.00%  0.50%  0.50%  0.50%  0.00% (CabOSil MSP)Lubricant Magnesium stearate  1.50%  1.50%  1.50%  0.00%  1.50%  1.50% 1.50%  0.00%

What is claimed is:
 1. A method of treating cancer in a mammal, themethod comprising administering to the mammal a therapeuticallyeffective amount of a tablet comprising 45-90% w/w of an activepharmaceutical ingredient compound8-fluoro-2-{4-[(methylamino)methyl]phenyl}-1,3,4,5-tetrahydro-6H-azepino[5,4,3-cd]indol-6-onecamsylate.
 2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the activepharmaceutical ingredient is included in the range of 50-90%.
 3. Themethod according to claim 1, wherein the active pharmaceuticalingredient is included in the range of 55-90%.
 4. The method accordingto claim 1, wherein the active pharmaceutical ingredient is included inthe range of 60-90%.
 5. The method according to claim 1, wherein theactive pharmaceutical ingredient is included in the range of 65-85%. 6.The method according to claim 1, wherein the active pharmaceuticalingredient is included in the range of 70-80%.
 7. The method accordingto claim 1, wherein the tablet includes 200 mg or more of8-fluoro-2-{4-[(methylamino)methyl]phenyl}-1,3,4,5-tetrahydro-6H-azepino[5,4,3-cd]indol-6-one.8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the tablet includes 250 mgor more of8-fluoro-2-{4-[(methylamino)methyl]phenyl}-1,3,4,5-tetrahydro-6H-azepino[5,4,3-cd]indol-6-one.9. The method according to claim 1, wherein the tablet includes 300 mgor more of8-fluoro-2-{4-[(methylamino)methyl]phenyl}-1,3,4,5-tetrahydro-6H-azepino[5,4,3-cd]indol-6-one.10. The method according to claim 1, wherein the mammal is a humanbeing.
 11. A method of treating cancer in a mammal, the methodcomprising administering to the mammal a therapeutically effectiveamount of a dry granulated tablet comprising 45-90% w/w of an activepharmaceutical ingredient compound8-fluoro-2-{4-[(methylamino)methyl]phenyl}-1,3,4,5-tetrahydro-6H-azepino[5,4,3-cd]indol-6-onecamsylate, wherein the tablet includes 200 mg or more of8-fluoro-2-{4-[(methylamino)methyl]phenyl}-1,3,4,5-tetrahydro-6H-azepino[5,4,3-cd]indol-6-one.